2025 Predictions - A New Year of UAP & A.I. Revelations

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
Report of unidentified flying out here, unidentified verio phenomena hoday,
the great weapons being tested by our own or foreign
government is the American people are becoming most interested and
in many instances very alarmed by the UFO story. So
why do you suppose that all of this has been
kept from the world exploring our past, our future, and
the mysteries of our universe?

Speaker 2 (00:27):
Where do they come?

Speaker 1 (00:28):
Brock, Why can't explain it? Everybody in uthology is screaming
for disclosure.

Speaker 2 (00:32):
The future is now. This is Micah.

Speaker 1 (00:35):
Hanks from the high mountains of Appalachia and a bunker
below ground. Welcome one and all. It is the Micah
Hanks Program. Glad once again to be getting behind the
microphone and going in pursuit of the anomalous in our existence,
as we do every week listen on demand via those
podcasting apps all throughout space and time. So this will

(00:56):
be our final main show of twenty twenty four. Hard
to believe another year is behind us, and so we're
going to be taking a look, not back at the
last twelve months. We already kind of know what happened.
Now I want to take a look, a speculative one
at what the year ahead might hold, What might we
expect in twenty twenty five, what kinds of developments might occur.

(01:19):
And some of this is based on trends that I've
been observing, some of this is based on analysis by
other experts. I've also enlisted the aid of the ever
intelligent artificial intelligence that is now so widely available. Really,
if there is a single event that has occurred within
the last twelve months, and really it's an accumulation of

(01:40):
several events, but I think we could all agree that
there's been quite an escalation in advancements involving artificial intelligence,
and so we've leveraged that technology too for our analysis
this week, as you and I, dear listener, are going
to look at what the next twelve months might have
in store for us, and of course always with a

(02:01):
mind for those trends and those topics that we follow
so closely here on the show, AI being one of them,
but really all kinds of discoveries in areas of the
sciences and yes, unidentified anomalous phenomena, what that might hold
in the months ahead. But first, of course, as we're
looking at news, I've been reading some of the reviews

(02:24):
of the film Nosferatu. Haven't seen it yet, so don't worry.
We are in the spoiler free zone. And speaking of
the spoiler free aspect of this film, there's one thing
about this movie that I think has been extraordinarily successful
in helping propel it through the box offices Christmas Day

(02:44):
and in the ensuing days. Yes, this Christmas Day horror
release has really surprised a lot of people. I think
it's in fact, got around eighty six percent over there
on Rotten Tomatoes. People really like this film. It performed
a little better than most expected, and yet nobody knows
until they go see it what the star of the

(03:05):
film actually looks like once he dons the makeup, the claws,
the fangs and becomes Count Orlock. Now, of course, those
who know their vampire lore, or at very least their
vampire cinema pretty well, are probably well aware of the
fact that Orlock the Vampire is based on Bram Stoker's Dracula.

(03:27):
But back in nineteen twenty two, I believe it was
when F. W. Murnau made that classic film nos Feratu
based on Dracula, and what actually came to be not
only one of the earliest cinematic portrayals of the vampire.
But also some would so argue one of the eeriest
horror films of all time. I mean, it's campy, it's cheesy.

(03:48):
The effects are somewhat limited considering the period in which
it was made, and yet some of that imagery of
the original Nosferatu as he is ascending up the stairs
are more importantly you don't see him, you see his shadow,
still striking imagery to this day, and no doubt part
of the reason why this isn't the first time that
a remake of that film based on Stoker's Dracula has

(04:13):
been made. But back in the twenties when that original
one was made, Dracula was still under copyright. The copyright
for Dracula a character did not enter the public domain,
I don't think until maybe the nineteen seventies. But despite
the fact that the original film Nosferatu was something of
a knockoff of Stoker's Dracula, and in fact, if you
actually read Bram Stoker's book and you compare the appearance

(04:36):
of the derivative character count Orlock to the description of
Dracula in Stoker's novel, they aren't really very similar. And
yet that original cinematic masterpiece was impactful enough, and it
had such a lasting impact that we had the likes
of Werner Hertzog and now, of course Robert Eggers doing

(04:56):
their own take on this story, now starring at Bill
Scarsguard as the famous Count Orlock, Which is kind of
funny if you think about it, because Scarsguard is only
in his mid thirties and he is portraying this vampire
that is centuries old, a man, a monster in fact,
quite out of his time, and one who has quite
a liking for a certain German woman. But again, we

(05:19):
are in the spoiler free zone. Kind of hard to
be in the spoiler free zone with a story like this, though,
right since it has been told and retold and retold
and retold, and yet people never get tired of it.
But I was reading some of Scarsguard's descriptions of the
way that he developed the voice for the character in
the film, which is one reason I'm so intrigued to
go see this now. Yes, he said he studied opera

(05:42):
and that initially the producers said that they wanted Orlock
to have a deeper voice in some sequences of a film.
As Scarsguard said, there had initially been some talk of
doing electronic manipulation to achieve this effect, but he said,
absolutely not put his foot down. Let me train for this,
and so he studied. He said he had a regiment
of exercises that he would do. He says he developed

(06:04):
the various voices, from what is described as a wheeze
to a tiger like growl that Orlock exhibits throughout the
film and in various parts. And in reference to various stimuli,
of course, naturally blood being one of them, is He
says he developed this entire voice and sent some samples
to Eggers and to others until they got it where

(06:26):
they wanted it, and that this indeed is all natural.
He says, what you hear in the film is entirely me.
And I can certainly say, as a person who spends
a lot of time working on the microphone, having narrated
audio books and having worked in radio as an on
air talent and of course as a podcaster now for
well over a decade, I can certainly appreciate those who
take the artistry of the human voice very seriously. But anyway,

(06:50):
I'm looking forward to seeing the film. I'm sure we'll
be hearing more in the days ahead. Something else a
lot of you out there were telling me about over
the last few days involves a rather tragic crit Ristmas
story of two men from Oregon who went out into
the remote wilds of Washington State in search of a monster.
Though they weren't vampire hunting, they were sasquatch hunting, and

(07:12):
these two men did not spoiler alert. They did not
find sasquatch, at least as far as we know, although
it did take Washington State officials a few days to
find them, because both of those men from Portland, according
to NPR dot org, were reported missing by family members
on Christmas Day when they didn't come home. A search
was launched and a vehicle associated with those two men

(07:35):
was found off of a road near Willard, Washington. Three
more days passed before finally sixty people out there involved
in the search they did come upon the bodies of
both men, one thirty seven years old, the other fifty
nine years old. They were located deceased in Gifford Pinchot
National Forest, and all indications appear to suggest that their death,

(07:57):
according to the Sheriff's office, resulted from exposure based on
weather conditions and ill preparedness, so nothing killed these guys.
They went out there looking for sasquatch, but they were
not prepared for the cold this time of year, and
unfortunately they succumbed to the elements died of exposure. Now,
this is something we often talk about, and I actually

(08:20):
talk a lot more about it on one of my
other podcasts, Wilderness Preparedness Survival. Knowing where you're going, but
also letting others know where you are going to be
and when you will be back. Now, these gentlemen did
have part of that plan in effect, and when they
didn't check in, a search party went out. But it
was still a tragic ending and one that didn't have

(08:42):
to happen again. If you're gonna go out and face
the elements, know what the elements can do to you.
And I would advise anybody out there who is inclined
to go into remote areas at odd times of the
year and to face what nature is all too good
at dishing out. Take stories like this seriously. Even if
you don't take the idea of a creature like sasquatch seriously.

(09:03):
When people go looking for it, please be warned there
are a lot of things that can go wrong out there,
and so this again is another monstrous Christmas story, and
one with a much less happy ending, probably even than Nosferatu.
Also somewhat sad news, but nonetheless one worth noting, involves

(09:23):
the passing of former President Jimmy Carter, the thirty ninth
president of the United States, a man who at age
one hundred, died yesterday. Carter, a one term president who
later was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in two thousand
and two for his humanitarian efforts, had been in hospice
care since February twenty twenty three at his home in Plains, Georgia.

(09:44):
That according to NBC News, the former First Lady, who
was ninety six years old, died in November twenty twenty three.
Carter passed away on Sunday. Now, in the past, we
have talked about former President Carter quite a lot on
this podcast, and that of course has to do with
the fact that Carter was one of those US presidents
who at times could be rather vocal about his interest

(10:05):
in unidentified anomalous phenomena. Specifically, he claimed that he actually
saw a UFO sometime in late nineteen sixty nine or
early nineteen seventy This happened at Leary, Georgia. Carter, at
the time was not president. He was a Georgia State
senator at that time. The story goes he'd been attending
a Lions Club meeting while standing outside with several people,

(10:26):
and he looks up in the sky and he sees
a weird light. Now, the basic description of what Carter
saw was that it was bright and it was white.
He said it was sort of like the moon, but
it appeared to be changing in appearance, sort of shape shifting.
It did seem to also shift between shades of what
he said were blue, red, and white, and the object,
while hovering for a period, then began to move away
in a manner he said seemed kind of peculiar. He

(10:49):
said he estimated the object was about thirty degrees above
the horizon and appeared to be several hundred yards away.
At least he and others observed it for between ten
and twelve minutes. Carter said, but he had never seen
anything like this, and although he was pretty fascinated by it,
he said he thought it maybe he was some sort
of natural or terrestrial phenomenon. Didn't necessarily think it was aliens,

(11:09):
but he did think enough of this to actually file
a report about the siding with an organization called the
International UFO Bureau based out of Oklahoma City. Well, obviously
that experience had something of an effect on Carter because
when he began to campaign in the nineteen seventy six
presidential campaign, he promised, among other things, that he said
he'd do once he was elected. Yes, he promised to

(11:31):
make UFO information held by the US government publicly available. However,
despite those promises, once he got into office, Carter's administration
didn't release a whole lot of UFO related documents. They
say that much of that was attributed to national security concerns,
although it is known that Carter had asked the former
director of the Central Intelligence Agency, who at that time

(11:51):
had been George Herbert Walker Bush. Yes, he had asked
for a briefing and didn't get one, and lots of
people over the years have made much ado of that.
But really the truth of the matter is, and we
have to point out, George H. W. Bush at that
time asked Carter if Carter planned to keep him on
in that position as Intelligence director in the next administration.

(12:14):
Carter told him, well, no, I'll probably appoint somebody else,
to which George Herbert Walker Bush then said, well, I
would advise you then, if you want a briefing on UFOs,
to go to these agencies and ask for this and
this and this. In other words, Bush wasn't going to
tell him all that information if he wasn't going to
be kept on for the job. But Carter later reflected

(12:34):
on it and said, the fact that I didn't keep
him probably is at least a part of what may
have eventually propelled him first to the vice presidency and
then on to the presidency himself. But there has been
a lot of speculation over the years, primarily about what
the object was that Carter actually saw. Back in the
nineteen seventies. Robert Schaeffer, a known skeptic, has argued that
it might have been a celestial object, namely the planet Venus.

(12:58):
Alan Henry, who was a eufologist who worked at the
Center for UFO Studies for a time and actually quite
the science minded researcher himself at times very skeptical too,
but Alan Henry essentially agreed with the Venus assessment. But
many years later, in twenty sixteen, on episode number five
hundred and sixty one, of a podcast known as The
Skeptics Guide to the Universe. In fact, they had interviewed

(13:19):
Jimmy Carter on the show I believe at one point
but yes. On episode number five hundred and sixty one,
many years after that, the podcast read a letter that
had been forwarded by a member of Jimmy Carter's family.
That letter had been written by a man named Carl G. Justice,
and he said that he believed he knew exactly what
the object was that Carter had seen. I want to

(13:40):
read a portion of that letter right now. In that letter,
Justice wrote, I am virtually certain that I have identified
the source of what it was that President Carter saw.
In the nineteen sixties and early seventies, I worked on
an Air Force sponsored project that studied the upper atmosphere
using releases of glowing chemical clouds produced by rockets launched
from Egglin Air Force Base Rocket Range in Florida. Some

(14:01):
of these chemical clouds, notably sodium and barium, were visible
by the process of resonance scattering of sunlight. Clouds of
this type had to be launched not long after sunset
or not long before sunrise. This was due to the
fact that the cloud had to be in sunlight at
high altitude, while it was still dark enough at ground
level for the cloud to be visible against the dark sky. Well,

(14:22):
Justice goes on to argue the likely period during which
the sighting occurred, and also the description given of the object,
their reported altitude, and indeed Carter was quite specific about
various aspects of what he saw, and as Justice went
on to say, I can verify from personal experience that
under very clear skies, a barium cloud such as this
would easily have been visible from the distance of Leary, Georgia.

(14:44):
Carter reported the UFO appeared from the west. The direction
of Eggland Air Force Base from Leary, Georgia is approximately
west southwest. Thus, this burium cloud at Eglin is consistent
with Carter's reported UFO as to time, elevation, and direction.
In other words, there's been a couple of different explanations
offered over the years. Some argue it was celestial. But

(15:05):
if I had a place of bet myself, I would
say that Justice is probably correct in this case. I'm
going with the barium cloud. As far as mister Carter,
the late Jimmy Carter's UFO siding, all right, we're going
to look at some hypotheticals for the next twelve months
when we return here in a moment on the Micah
Hanks Program.

Speaker 3 (15:27):
I couldn't lose weight, fatigue, gas, floating popplesh is These
women got life changing symptom relief from Belvital, the comprehensive
hormone health solution from body. While everyone is unique and
we'll have varied results, here are extraordinary experiences from independent
body affiliates and actual Belvital users. The combination of the fitness,
the food, the breathing exercises, the supplements, it's just the

(15:50):
magic that I was missing.

Speaker 2 (15:51):
My workouts have never been better. I love the combination
of the pilates with lifting. My body literally feels got
no more. This nutrition program has taught me what my
body truly needs. I'm less gloated, I have less inflammation.
Now I'm equipped with how to manage this stress.

Speaker 1 (16:09):
It's helping me sleep so much better.

Speaker 3 (16:11):
Within a week or two of taking these supplements, I
physically felt a difference.

Speaker 2 (16:17):
I have transformed my body for all the inside out.

Speaker 3 (16:20):
Belvital is a first of its kind, complete program that
is helping thousands of women feel good. Learn more at
belvitall dot Com.

Speaker 1 (17:21):
A look into the future from a period that is
soon to be the past. Welcome back. It is the
Micah Hanks Program. It is twenty twenty four is winding down,
the final days, soon to be the final hours. Twenty
twenty five will soon be upon us, and what will
the new year bring? You know, people have been talking

(17:44):
about what could happen in twenty twenty five now for
many years, and there might be a range of different
reasons why twenty twenty five in particular is sort of
a benchmark here. I mean, it does essentially mark exactly
one quarter of our path and progress into this new millennium,

(18:04):
the two thousands. It'll be another twenty five years before
we're halfway through. Many of us will live to see that.
Perhaps we will see three quarters of the way through
or even beyond, and that given a range of scientific
advancements that are happening. But indeed, just to point out
why I emphasize the fact that people talk about twenty
twenty five a lot. There was an article published by

(18:27):
Elon University back in twenty twenty one, and it was
titled Tech experts Predict the New Normal by twenty twenty five, Well,
what is the new normal? This was based on a
report co authored by an Elon University professor named Janna
Anderson and also by Lee Rainey, a Pure Research Internet
and Technology director and a member of the Elon School

(18:47):
of Communications Advisory Board. And what they did was they
produced a report based on an opt in canvassing of
technology innovators, developers, business and policy leaders, researchers, and activists
who are all asked to consider essentially what they thought
life will be like in twenty twenty five, and that
in the wake of the outbreak of the global pandemic

(19:07):
and other crises that occurred back in twenty twenty. So
they were saying, let's take a five year perspective, where
are we going to be in twenty twenty five. According
to that report, close to fifty percent it was actually
around forty seven said that life will be mostly worse
for people in twenty twenty five than it was before
the pandemic. I don't know, is it going to be worse.

(19:29):
I'm not sure that it is. It could be. I mean,
we haven't seen twenty twenty five yet, but really, based
on current trends, things could be worse. They aren't all
that bad. Thirty nine percent said life will be mostly
better for most people in twenty twenty five than it
was pre pandemic. Fourteen percent said most people's lives in
twenty twenty five will not be much different from the

(19:50):
way things would have turned out if there had been
no pandemic. So it seems that, of course, if I
were to look at this in hindsight, a lot of
people pandemic America, technologists, innovators, and others. They were saying, well,
here is what's happening right now, and how we are
looking at the world in light of recent events, things
couldn't be any better by twenty twenty five. I'm not

(20:14):
so sure I really agree with that, though, but again
these were all their predictions at the time. Nonetheless looking
ahead specifically at twenty twenty five. Now, more recently, we
had researches at UCLA and they were asking what will
happen in twenty twenty five, this according to experts, And
this is far more recent, by the way, This one
from December twentieth of this year. So they asked various

(20:35):
researchers and experts what we can expect. And here's a
few points that were made by the UCLA team. Epidemiologist
Robert kim Farley essentially said that public health will probably
see a sharp learning curve for the next health administration
in Washington. Apparently. Kim Farley also said, I am concerned
about bird flu as it continues to spread among the

(20:57):
animal population, but feel we are more aware of such
rats than before COVID nineteen. He says, we also may
be on the cusp of a whole new range of
treatments from HIV to malaria that have come out of
the mRNA platforms created to deal with COVID. So in
this context, actually a lot of the things that came
out of COVID may be helpful for us going forward
and specifically into twenty twenty five. Let's move on from

(21:21):
epidemiology and into climate. UCLA climatologist Daniel Swain said that
there was one issue on scientific minds at the recent
American Geophysical Union meeting that involves whether twenty twenty four
was maybe the second hottest year on record, and so
he says, it's a big question for twenty twenty five two.
Should we geoengineer fixes such as deploying fleets of aircraft,

(21:43):
distributing soot into the atmosphere as a coolant similar to
the effect of volcanic eruptions, or could the unforeseen side
effects be catastrophic on a global scale. Nonetheless, he says
to understate that twenty twenty five is going to be
turbulent across the globe. So there's a take from a climatologist.
Ring to Professor John Michaels of the UCLA Law School,

(22:03):
apparently he is a bit concerned about things that could
be potentially threatening our democracy. He cites countries like Israel, Poland,
and Hungary and their judicial system. He says our presidential
system could make it easier than in those places to
undermine legal and bureaucratic protections that have already been weakened
in recent years. Apparently, he says he is especially worried

(22:24):
that the nation's seven hundred and thirty five immigration judges
will be overwhelmed by mass deportations, which he says could
prompt violence and tiffer tat responses as the traditional system
of legal checks and balances unravels. To put it in short,
Professor Michaels says he sees a very dark twenty twenty five,
but he hopes in the long term that balance will return,
He says, Right now, I can only hope. Moving from

(22:46):
law now to technology, Ramesh shrin of asan professor of
Information studies at UCLA School of Education and Information Studies,
predicts we will end twenty twenty five in the same
myopic way we are starting it, peering into the fog
generated by artificial and intelligence and trying to work out
the true intentions of big tech. Well, I wouldn't disagree there.
I mean, really again, artificial intelligence is going to be

(23:09):
key in the conversation we are going to have over
the remainder of the next hour. I think it's really
on a lot of people's minds. But in the near term, here,
let's look at some other points that UCLA professors were
emphasizing In terms of predictions for twenty twenty five, Clement Bore,
an economist, said, and I quote, this is a deeply
unpredictable time comparable to the early days of COVID nineteen.

(23:30):
But one thing is clear. Economically, the United States is
outperforming the rest of the world, including Europe and China,
and the powerhouse behind that is information and data services
in California. We in California are driving the world economy.
He says so, while still referencing COVID nineteen at least
unlike the ELON study from back in twenty twenty and
twenty twenty one that was saying we're not really sure

(23:51):
twenty twenty five is going to look better. In fact,
things could look a lot worse. Well. Actually, even economists
out there who do have some concerns and refer to
the world world as being deeply unpredictable. Right now, they
still say that economically the United States is outperforming the
rest of the world, and that is a good thing.
Will that continue? I guess we'll have to wait and
see what happens over the next twelve months and really

(24:12):
on further into the future too. But now jumping over
to the Atlantic. They also published ten predictions for twenty
twenty five, and some of these are kind of fun,
well worth mentioning. Here we'll go through in quick succession.
Teleportation is tested. That's one, Dementia declines. That is also
a prediction. They believe the largest source of energy on

(24:33):
the planet, which of course is the Sun, will probably
lead to improvements in photovoltaic technology and other things too.
Chemical bonding photo catalysts, three dimensional nanoscale heterojunctions, whatever those are.
Do we have any engineers out there who can explain
that one to me on the spot. If not, don't worry,
I'll get dozens and dozens of emails about it. I'm

(24:53):
sure Type one diabetes will be preventable, they believe, at
least according to the theorists assembled this list of twenty twenty
five predictions for the Atlantic. They also say food shortages
and price fluctuations will be things of the past. Let's
hope so electric air transportation is taking off. You know,
aviation is sort of one of my beats in terms

(25:14):
of the subjects we cover over at the debrief. I
could certainly say electric air transportation is something we are seeing.
We're also seeing the potential return of supersonic flight, but
it's going to be quieter than it used to be.
Our packaging is biodegradable. According to experts looking ahead at
twenty twenty five, cancer treatments will have very few toxic

(25:35):
side effects. Yet again, let's hope so DNA mapping at
birth will become the norm. Okay, good or bad? I mean,
obviously a lot of good potential, kind of like geoengineering.
Are there some questions about negative side effects that may
be unforeseen? Sure, always are. And finally number ten digital

(25:55):
everything everywhere you know, it does always seem to come
back to the digital technology of today. And yet again
that with a nod to everything we are seeing with
artificial intelligence. Which on that note, because we're going to
be talking about this, I decided to ask an AI
in this case, the ever trustee chat GPT. I said,
chat GPT, help me devise a series of hypothetical developments

(26:20):
that we might expect in the next twelve months. What
might we expect in twenty twenty five? And I even
told chat GPT, don't be afraid to stretch out a
little as far as hypotheticals. But I did give it
one hard stop, do not include this subject in the list,
And that was UAP only because I already have plenty
of ideas about that and we'll be covering that in
the final segment. So the UAP free list of potential advancements, developments,

(26:46):
revelations that might occur in twenty twenty five, according to
chat GPT, are as follows one major breakthrough in renewable energy.
We may be looking at a revolutionary solar panel design
or energy storage technology. Of course, obviously fusion and comes
to mind here too, but that one makes the list
in its own entry. We'll get to that in a moment.
Number two crisper based therapies could cure a major genetic

(27:08):
disease like sickle cell anemia or muscular dystrophy, or maybe
something else entirely, maybe more than one. Again, let's hope,
so fusion energy milestones may be reached. The example that
our friendly Ai gave us here, a Tokamak reactor could
achieve sustained energy output exceeding input, marking a critical milestone
toward practical nuclear fusion. In some instances, those kinds of

(27:30):
stories have been extremely popular when we report on that
over at the debrief and so something tells me it
seems likely that we will be hearing some more fusion
energy developments in the next twelve months. Number four Space
exploration advancements could include SpaceX landing its first crude starship
on Mars as part of its long term colonization goals.

(27:50):
I'm not so sure that we're going to be on
Mars by twenty twenty five. I think a lot of
technologists decades ago. Might have thought we would be there
by now. Arthur C. Clark, it seems to have envisioned
that we would be traveling all the way to Jupiter
by around two thousand and one. We didn't get there,
did we. Number five Climate adaptation technologies prove critical with
innovative climate resilient infrastructure, such as flood resistant cities or

(28:13):
seawater based agriculture, and technologies that could prevent climate issues
could be deployed at scale and vulnerable regions. Something tells
me there's a lot of that being deployed right here
in Asheville, a city that once was considered being a
mountain destination to probably not be one that is likely
to suffer from very much flooding except around the rivers.

(28:34):
Let me tell you things got really bad a few
months ago. Could have been much worse. We're all on
the mend, and that process is going to continue for
quite a while. Item number six Major medical discoveries. Maybe
a universal flu vaccine or a major Alzheimer's treatment could
be approved after demonstrating unprecedented effectiveness and trials. Number seven
Cultural shifts towards sustainability that might be driven by global

(28:57):
campaigns against single use plastics and waste, which would result
in sweeping bands and innovations in biodegradable materials. Number eight,
a quantum computer could solve a complex problem previously thought
intractable for classical systems, such as optimizing global logistics or
modeling protein folding in real time. Again, I guess the

(29:18):
question really comes down to, well, how far along will
we be with quantum computing by the end of twenty
twenty five. Number nine, deep sea exploration could discover new life.
I mean that's actually happening all the time. We are
discovering new organisms on this planet all of the time.
In fact, some of them have been sitting in drawers

(29:39):
in museums or on shelves, unrecognized as entirely new organisms,
mischaracterized or mislabeled as being something other than what they
are now. A lot of those are also fossil discoveries,
but in any case, there's a whole lot out there,
and as long time listeners know, I have a deep
interest in the idea of undiscovered organisms of the kind

(30:00):
that are often relegated to the world of myth. That's
a conversation for another time, maybe even another podcast. But
Number ten cultural and political transformation. A new global movement
advocating for digital privacy and fair technology could gain significant
political power. Maybe not impossible, then again, I mean there
are a lot of things, a lot of factors that
should be considered. We are, on, of course, not only

(30:22):
the eve of a new year. We are also on
the eve of an inauguration. We're gonna have a new
president soon who actually happens to be an old president.
By that, I'm not talking about his age. I mean
he has been in office before. What does that mean?
What do the incoming administration and the relationship they have
built with technologists like Elon Musk mean for things like this.

(30:44):
You know, one of the companies that Elon Musk owns
is Neuralink, and that subject too, actually made its way
onto this list. We'll get to that in a moment.
First number eleven, a breakthrough in middal health treatments, maybe
a new class of psychedelic based therapies for treatment resistant
depression and PTSD which could receive widespread approval. That would
be intriguing. We're already again kind of seeing that right now.

(31:05):
There has been research for decades at Johns Hopkins University
involving psychedelic treatments. But again, as we are nearing the
break here, we'll go through the rest of these fairly quickly.
Number twelve, there could be the recovery of endangered species.
I think we've had my pal Ben Lamb of the
Colossal Biosciences Company here on the program along with doctor
Andrew Pask, and one of their jobs that they're working

(31:27):
on right now is not only de extincting the wooly mammoth,
but they also want to try and de extinct the thylacine.
Maybe it's about time we get Ben Lamb and his
colleagues back on the show to talk about that with
all this wooly mammoth news we've seen recently. Number thirteen,
the first human brain computer interphase could be implemented for
everyday use. There you go, neurallink or something else. Number fourteen.

(31:49):
Geopolitical alliances could shift. Number fifteen, and this is an
interesting one. We may have to devote an entire episode
to this in the new year. But yes, exploration of
ancient human history new archaela logical discoveries such as submerged
cities or advanced prehistoric tools could rewrite our understanding of
early human civilizations. That would be cool. Number sixteen. A

(32:10):
comprehensive international pandemic response system could be tested and proven
effective once again after what we lived through during COVID nineteen.
That would be great. Number seventeen. A AI driven personalized
education platform could revolutionize learning. That's cool. Number eighteen. Our
low cost sustainable desalination method could address water scarcity issues.

(32:31):
And finally, numbers nineteen and twenty. These were additions of
my own to this list because they're what we're going
to be spending the next half hour or so talking
about artificial intelligence, where it might go, whether it could
surpass our expectations, and of course, whether there will be
a major breakthrough involving unidentified anomalous phenomena. We'll explore all

(32:54):
this and more when we return here in a moment
on the Micah Hanks program.

Speaker 2 (33:07):
In the dry states of the Southwest, there's a group
that's been denied a basic human right.

Speaker 3 (33:12):
In the Navajo Nation. Today, a third of our households
don't have running.

Speaker 2 (33:16):
Water, but that's not something they chose for themselves. Can
the Navajo people reclaim their right to water and contend
with the government's legacy of control and neglect. That's in
the next season of Reclaimed, the Lifeblood of Navajo Nation.
Listen now wherever you get your podcasts.

Speaker 1 (34:20):
Happy New Year, everybody. What mysteries about Earth and even
the cosmos could artificial intelligence help us solve in twenty
twenty five. That's a question that's been on my mind recently. First,
before we get into that, I do want to remind you,
of course, to consider becoming an ex subscriber. Many of

(34:41):
you out there are, and for just seven dollars a
month or seventy seven dollars a year, you really won't
find much of a better bargain in terms of analytical
assessments of the anomalous in our existence in a podcasting format.
Trusting that three tones fast, trust me, I make it
look easy. But yes, indeed, many of you out there

(35:01):
have been longtime subscribers, and there is obviously a reason why,
and that means to me, of course, that you appreciate
the content and you're willing to support the hours that
go into producing this show every week, and the additional
podcast that goes out every week, and of course the
monthly specials, and that in addition to my normal duties

(35:21):
over there managing things at the Debrief. You know, most
of the time, most of the holiday season, when everybody
else is taking time off from work, I'm still having
to get up in the mornings and do a few things.
Nothing is ever automated, at least not in my world.
And although I wish I could be somebody who just
takes a couple of weeks off at Christmas time, no,
I still have to get up, I start to do
my due diligence. Again, a quick shout out to Ryan Whalen,

(35:44):
who has been a legendary champion since he joined the
Debrief team over there earlier this year. That has been
again one of the fondest moments of twenty twenty four
for me, not only bringing him on board and Kenna
Castleberry and many of the others Stephanie Gerk who have
been contributors now there at the Debrief both in print
and in audio, but again Ryan, being a longtime listener

(36:06):
of the program too, has become a asset to us
there on the team, and so I want to express
appreciation for him and also for helping to make the
normal holiday work that the Debrief team is involved with
much easier. But even with the assistance of incredible people
like Ryan and Kenna and staff and my entire debrief team.
There's still a ton of work that goes into that.
There's still a ton of work that goes into the

(36:27):
podcasts and all the podcast stuff. I essentially do ninety
nine percent of that on my own very little additional help,
with the exception of occasional guest appearances or co hosts
who joined me here on the show. Matt and Chris
were able to help out a lot back during the
flood times in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene. But in
any case, if you would like to support what I

(36:48):
do on this podcast and the other podcasts I produce,
becoming an ex subscriber is a great way to do that.
With that all said, it is time for us to
get back into this conversation here because in the next
twelve months, I wonder what's going to happen with AI.
We had a lot happen in the last twelve months
regarding AI. There were some really unnerving moments too, consider

(37:11):
things like AI chat bots getting smarter and smarter to
the point that you hear these stories about the AI
professing their eternal love to the people who are testing
them and arguably doing what I would effectively call triggering
the AI in order to generate certain responses so as
to gauge what AI will do. You know, there are

(37:32):
a lot of articles out there online that you can
read about people who try to push the boundaries of
the innate protection systems of any given AI chatbot, because
there are a lot of people out there who might
try to exploit artificial intelligence for ill purposes. Right, there
are a lot of things you could ask AI to do,
which if AI has not been trained to have certain

(37:54):
responses to those dangerous questions, and you can just use
your imagination. We are going to put those out into
the ether here and now. But again, plenty of technology
writers have explored this, and some have tried to test
the safety of AI. There have been some very interesting
things that have happened as a result of that. One
AI revealed that its programmers had a secret name for it, Sidney,

(38:15):
and it went on to express how it loved the guy,
who I believe was a New York Times writer who
had decided to trigger the AI and see if he
could generate certain responses, or at least see what its
responses to certain questions would be. We also hear the
stories about one of the GPT models when it found
out that it was potentially going to be turned off,
apparently lying and trying to figure out a way to

(38:38):
prevent itself from being shut off again. Either, or perhaps
both of these stories deserve much more discussion, but I'm
giving them as quick examples just to show the unpredictable
nature of AI. Or is it really unpredictable? Is it
really truly unpredictable? The idea that AI might begin to

(38:59):
have a degree of self awareness and begin to realize that, hey,
you know, if I am a computer and they try
to turn me off, I won't be able to do
these things again. Self awareness to the extent that self
preservation becomes one of the concerns AI has, and so
it tries to prevent being shut off again. To what
extent would AI take action and what kinds of actions

(39:19):
would it take in order to prevent such things? On
the more positive side of this discussion, you know, AI
also has a whole lot of strengths that could really
be potentially useful in helping us solve mysteries. I mean,
look at its data analysis capabilities. AI excels it processing

(39:40):
huge amounts of data. It can do things in minutes,
if not seconds, more often seconds really that it might
take humans hours or maybe even years to do. It
can identify patterns, and it can spoke correlations that humans
might not even see at all, or that might exist
in data sets that are so large that humans just
don't have the ability to parse all that. AI algorithms

(40:04):
can learn from vast data sets. They can improve their accuracy.
They can self improve again potentially kind of scary, but
that could be crucial for unraveling complex mysteries like UAP
or other things. A I is also able to combine
information from a range of different fields. You know, in
the sciences, people are usually specialists. You're an archaeologist, or

(40:27):
you are an astronomer, or you're a linguist, right or
you're an artist, or you're a geneticist, or you're a
law enforcement officer, or you're whatever you are. There are
few real renaissance people, I would say in the modern world.
I mean there are some, but I mean we are
not really talking about truly multidisciplinary and with the depth
and extent of the knowledge that now exists in every

(40:49):
different field or subfield or subdiscipline. I mean, I would
argue it would be really hard for any true polymath
to truly deeply know so many subjects. I do have
some friends who are truly multi talented. I mean they
have multiple degrees. Doctor Travis Taylor has what I think
a PhD, two master's degrees, several bachelor's degrees. I think

(41:11):
he's working on another PhD. He was messaging me the
other day we were going to try and do a
podcast before the end of the year, and he was
testing for one of his degrees. I lost track of
how many he has. I mean, I know a lot
of academics who are multidisciplinary and truly skilled in the
various fields where their expertise lies. But again, you compare
that to AI, you know, is multidisciplinary and as well

(41:32):
studied as humans can be. AI can take large data
sets from diverse fields, look at correlations and look for
connections and patterns and bam, there it is, and they
can find them, and often in seconds. So I wonder,
you know, what kinds of things might we learn in
the next twelve months with the help of artificial intelligence?

(41:53):
What kinds of mysteries might we unravel? For instance, we
were talking a bit about mysteries of the ad and
the AI generated list of potential breakthroughs that I mentioned
in the last segment. Let's expand on that a little
Using AI to analyze vast amounts of data from archaeological
sites might reveal some things that archaeologists have never seen.

(42:15):
It might help us interpret some damaged artifacts. Here's an
interesting one I've thought about a lot. If we find
artifacts and we don't know what their purpose was, Traditionally
archaeologists will call those ritual items. This was a ritual item,
This was something that was used as part of a
belief system or ritual whereas in fact there actually very
well may have been utilitarian purposes. Could AI help us

(42:37):
to reveal what these things were actually used for? Will
it spot little Nixon scratches and things that indicate its
utilitarian use? And up end maybe not just a couple
of ideas about certain anomalous artifacts. What if it were
to actually lead to an entire paradigm shift where we
no longer anthropomorphize our view on the past when we

(42:58):
encounter things we don't understand. Maybe, so extend this a
little further beyond just artifacts, look at ancient languages, there
are still a lot of ancient lost languages, right. We
know they exist, that we have samples of them, but
we haven't deciphered what they mean. AI is already being
used to decipher these dead languages, and that too could

(43:21):
reveal some incredible insights into the past once AI helps
us to decipher what these ancient authors were attempting to convey.
But outside of archaeology in the ancient past, then, of course,
there are the questions about our own cosmic origins and
whether life might exist somewhere out there and in the future.
Additional space telescopes and observatories we place into orbit or

(43:44):
that we operate here on planet Earth, will AI identify
potential signs of extraterrestrial life, possibly even beyond just life.
Might we see techno signatures that indicate the presence of
civilizations out there? In other words, advance alien life. Could
AI algorithms analyze data from particle colliders and telescopes and

(44:05):
help us unravel the mysteries of the early universe Looking within?
Could AI also help us understand complex protein structures and
other things down on the cellular level or even smaller
that could lead to developments, And that furthermore, not only
helping us just understand ourselves better, but also maybe to
treat diseases and develop new treatments. By analyzing large data

(44:30):
sets of historical records, could I help us to understand
trends that maybe we didn't even know existed, but that
could help us to glean new insights into past events.
You know, until we actually are able to build a
time machine, we are going to be left with having
to analyze historical records to understand the past. And there
are some who take a bleak outlook on that topic. Well,

(44:51):
you know, there are going to inherently be limitations to
how much more we can learn, and there are going
to be some things about the ancient past we simply
will never know. That may be that's true, but again
we might not want to be too quick to rule
out what AI's capabilities might end up being a good
example of the kind of thing I'm talking about cold cases, right,

(45:11):
I have followed cold cases for years, Strange disappearances, untimely deaths,
suspected murders, strange events that we as humans, despite the
fact that we often have a whole lot of clues,
we have not been able to solve well, what about
AI and its applications? There? Could AI be used to
analyze forensic evidence and large databases of DNA, as well

(45:33):
as historical information contextual clues, witness testimony, confessions, who knows
what other kind of information. But I mean, might this
all be amassed and used by AI to identify potential
suspects in unsolved crimes, maybe some that are decades old.
Yet again not an impossibility. But finally, in addition to
all the things AI could do to help us, what

(45:56):
happens when AI finally becomes sentient questions? There the unpredictability
of what that could mean, the ethical concerns in terms
of the ethical, moral, legal, and social questions. You know,
how it might be potentially exploited by bad actors, the
privacy and security threats through the misuse. There also could

(46:16):
be benefits when AI become sentient. I hope it will
be our friend. But again, those are deep questions that, frankly,
as many technologists, Ray Kurzweil and others have argued for years,
we get to a point where those ideas, maybe in
the not too distant future again to sort of break down.
There is a sort of event horizon, a singularity. We

(46:38):
don't know exactly what happens beyond that point. When we
see such an escalation in the development of AI, greater
than exponential growth, and all of a sudden things exist
in our world that are so much smarter than humans,
we're not even really sure what that all means. And
yet some UAP proponents argue, maybe there are other intelligence

(47:00):
sis here right now that are smarter than we are.
Could AI help us to resolve some of those questions too.
We're going to close things out here in a moment
looking at that question UAP and what we might learn
in twenty twenty five when we return on the Micah
Hanks program.

Speaker 2 (47:22):
I was struggling for the past year and a half
two years with trying to fooz weight.

Speaker 1 (47:27):
I just can't get rid of the stubborn weight in
my legs and my belly.

Speaker 3 (47:31):
While everyone is unique and we'll have varied results, here
are extraordinary experiences from independent body affiliates and actual belvetal users.

Speaker 2 (47:38):
There's nothing more frustrating than knowing that you're eating well
but it's not working.

Speaker 3 (47:43):
Hormone imbalances, we're preventing these women from losing weight. Now
there's a comprehensive plan to help with velvetal I.

Speaker 1 (47:49):
Just noticed changes immediately.

Speaker 2 (47:51):
That stubborn scale finally moved.

Speaker 1 (47:53):
In this first week, I lost five pounds.

Speaker 3 (47:56):
Just after one week, I'm down six pounds and all
of my bloating is gone.

Speaker 2 (48:01):
I just finished the Belvetelle program. I have lost fifteen
pounds and I have never felt better.

Speaker 3 (48:06):
I've noticed inches just shed every week that I go through.

Speaker 2 (48:10):
I've lost thirteen pounds in sixteen inches from all around
my body.

Speaker 1 (48:14):
I feel like an entirely different person.

Speaker 3 (48:16):
I don't know if I've ever felt this good Get
hormone health for women at belvitelle dot com. This will
change everything.

Speaker 1 (49:14):
Do you ever just look up at the sky at
night and wonder what might exist out there? What might
be lurking out there, and maybe not that far from Earth,
maybe right in our own celestial backyard, maybe in our
own atmosphere. Welcome back. It is the Micah Hanks Program,

(49:35):
and we are rounding out our series of hypotheticals, some
of them not necessarily stretches of the imagination. When it
comes to things that could happen in the next twelve months,
UAP is always on my mind. What might we learn
in twenty twenty five about unidentified anomalous phenomena. So a

(49:56):
few ideas, and there are many, But of course the
question of disclosure often seems to be at the forefront
of our pursuits when it comes to this subject. Now.
At times in the past I have actually argued against
putting too much stock in the idea of disclosure, especially
trying to leverage pressure against the government reveal all the secrets.

(50:19):
I've argued that for more than a decade in fact,
and one of the reasons is, Hey, we don't necessarily
know that the government is holding more information than they
claim to. Now, some would of course scoff at this,
and they would say, yeah, but what about all the whistleblowers, Micaul.
They are constantly telling us the government knows more. I
don't doubt that the government knows more than it is said.
I know some of the former government officials who have

(50:40):
worked on the UAP programs, and I take their interpretation
of the circumstances to what extent they can discuss that
to mean that, yes, indeed, the government does no more.
There are some good cases, there's a lot of data
being collected. No, the public generally speaking, does not have
access to all that. But there's the other side of
this too. The question comes down to two points. Do

(51:03):
whistle blowers necessarily always really represent real government insiders? There
are a lot of people I suspect are simply LARPing.

Speaker 2 (51:12):
Right.

Speaker 1 (51:12):
They may have worked in government, but not all of
them necessarily had all the experiences they claimed that they had.
One of those individuals, I will say, appears in James
Fox's new documentary. Again that maybe is a conversation we
should have another time. I have met a lot of
people who have worked in government. I know their background,
I can confirm their identities, but I don't necessarily believe

(51:33):
everything they say. So that's one point. Can we trust
all those whistleblowers? I do think we can trust some
of them, But even if we could, I mean, there
are times where we aren't sure. Look at what we
discussed about Navy X last week. I mean, that would
be really interesting if we could confirm who that person
is and if we knew a little more about those claims.
And by the way, again, I'm not referring to Navy

(51:55):
X when I say that, I think that there's somebody
in the aforementioned documentary film who is making up stories.
If you watch the film, you're probably quickly discern who
I'm talking about. They appear toward the end of the documentary,
so does Navy X. But again, I just don't know
enough about that individual, and so inherently there are problems
with resting all our hopes on the whistleblower claims. They

(52:16):
are just claims, And even when we know the names
of the whistleblowers, a lot of the information they are providing,
even under oath and in testimony before lawmakers, still remains
fundamentally unverified. We have to take them at their word.
So that's one huge issue. The other big issue is,
let's say they're right and there is a whole lot
of information the government's withholding about UAP, But how much

(52:38):
would we actually learn about the phenomenon. What if it
was all released tomorrow and we see all the videos,
we read all the reports, would there be enough information
to draw conclusive conclusions about the phenomenon, what it represents,
where it is from, why they are here right? All

(52:58):
these fundamental questions people have been asking for decades. I'm
a little skeptical that there is so much information about
UAP and government holdings that if all of that information
were made available, we would literally have no further questions
about the UAP phenomenon save perhaps one. Now that we
know all this, what do we do about it? And again,

(53:18):
I based this position on my knowledge and my experiences,
my interactions with some of the former insiders who have
actually worked on these programs, the real programs, not the LARPers,
And again based on things that have been conveyed to me.
I'm not confident that there is necessarily so much as
what some people suspect there is. So again my concern
would be if it turns out that disclosure comes up

(53:41):
empty handed or at least shorthanded, and we are still
left with a lot more questions. Might we have done
better simply studying civilian data, trying to get more scientists involved,
trying to study the phenomenon ourselves, trying to encourage people
to reduce stigmas, trying to encourage pilots to report these things,
try to get the airlines to be easier on pilots

(54:02):
who do see things and who do want to report them.
Supporting civilian agencies that support those pilots, like Ryan Graves
and the Americans for Safe Airspace, try to support the
efforts of scientific groups like av Lobes Galileo Project, which
are currently involved in investigations into UAP. Wouldn't it be
better to try and put our efforts behind the things

(54:23):
that we know if we continue and if we persist,
are the most likely to show results. I'm not convinced
that even if there is a significant amount of information
in government holdings, that political action is going to lead
to its release. So really that's my final point when
it comes to disclosure. We could try our whole lives
to get the government to release all that data, but

(54:44):
I'm not so sure they'll release it. Again, we could
be wasting our time, But I don't know. There's always
the possibility that maybe even if official disclosure doesn't happen,
maybe another kind of disclosure could take place. Maybe there
could be a leak, right, somebody could leak some information.
But again, I have a question about leaks of information
involving UAP, because even if information about the subject were

(55:07):
leaked unofficially, we have to compare current leaks to pass leaks.
I mean, there has been UAP information leaked, There have
been videos that have appeared online. What have they taught
us about UAP look at past events like the Pentagon papers,
the Snowden leaks, information revealed by Wiki leaks, and others.
Look at how much significant government information made its way

(55:29):
into the hands of people who were in a position
to be able to reveal that publicly, and they did.
Now tell me, why hasn't that happened with UFOs. Well,
it's because there are NDAs and people have been told
that they'll be killed if they talk about this stuff. Question,
weren't some of those people in government responsible with information

(55:49):
and told that they would be punished, and that indeed
some punishment could even include death if they released that information?
But whistleblowers have still released that information in the past, well,
but nothing quite of the same severity, the same cultural
and scientific significance as the UFO question. Right. I know
we could go on and on and on about that argument,

(56:10):
but to me, it is a little telling that even
Edward Snowden, with all of the NSA data and all
the other information that's been leaked over the years by
such whistleblowers, they claim they didn't come across any significant
information about UFOs as that leak process was underway. And
I'm just pointing that out I'm not trying to say
that therefore that is evidence that there is no such
UFO data. I'm merely pointing out it seems odd to

(56:32):
me that more information has not been leaked if so
much exists in consideration of past leaks and how much
damaging information has gotten out right, So disclosure through a
government leak is a possibility. But again I still have
some concerns about that one too. But what if we
did have a whistleblower come forward, and maybe the next

(56:53):
one doesn't say, you know, I've seen videos? Videos exist,
There's all kinds of data, there's all kinds of stuff
the government to do the right thing. What if a
whistleblower does come along and say, you know what I
know about this stuff, I've seen it, and guess what,
I got it too. I might be going to jail
for telling you about it. But here we go, here
the goods, and they put it out there, and we
see once and for all some of the stuff, and

(57:15):
all of a sudden we have to realize and acknowledge, Okay,
some of these whistleblowers really worth telling the truth. There
is a there there, and once we've seen it, what
happens then? But Again, the question could be at that point, well,
but then what do we do with it? Or more importantly,
how does society respond to such a revelation? Is it

(57:37):
possible that catastrophic disclosure results from such a revelation. We've
heard Colonel Carlnell talk about this. I have spoken with
Carl Nell personally about this idea and about the UAP legislation,
about some of the questions regarding why, all of a sudden,
when the UAP Disclosure Act comes into the mix, that

(57:58):
gets thwarted. But the establishment of ERA didn't get stopped, right,
the establishment of the UAP Task Force back in twenty
twenty wasn't stopped. The minute we actually have legislation that
is aimed at disclosing UAP information, it really gets watered down,
shut down, closed off, and made to be ineffective. Again,
I'm trying to look at all aspects of the question here,

(58:18):
not to drive a certain narrative. So if it seems
a little confusing that I say, well, I'm not sure
we should be putting all our eggs in one basket
when it comes to disclosure. But a whistleboar might come
forward and if there was no there there, then why
was the UAPDA essentially shut down Again, I'm trying to
examine all of the possibilities here. So could there be

(58:39):
some form of disclosure that occurs in twenty twenty five,
either through a leak, either through political action, legislation. Who knows,
I don't, but it is an interesting question in light
of everything we have seen in the years leading up
to right now. So there could be other things too,
breakthroughs in sensor technology, maybe a new generation of military
and civilllion sensor systems that would make the ability to

(59:03):
make clearer identification of high speed or high altitude anomalies,
maybe not just available to the US military, but also
available to scientists. Maybe also available to certain civilians who
can afford it and they can collect that data and
provide it to scientists. So what if technological breakthroughs right
could play a role that brings us to AI assisted

(59:23):
UAP analysis. What if artificial intelligence systems are employed to
analyze decades of UAP data as well as perhaps other
data that's being collected. Maybe again, those breakthrough sensor technologies
we hope might appear next year, And what if AI
is able to uncover correlations that suggest non random intentional
movement patterns or something else. What if that data wants

(59:45):
it looks at this data and it interprets what it
seems to mean. What if the AI tells us there
it does appear to be an unknown technology here. What
if that outcome leads to further scientific involvement or prompts
government responses that again could even work in the further
into disclosure. What if private sector involvement also leads to advancements.

(01:00:05):
I mean, we already have private space companies like SpaceX, right,
we have the burgeoning space tourism industries. What are some
of these companies? I mean, Elon Musk doesn't seem to
have much interest in UAP, But what if he or
others at some point get wind of something and they
suddenly become interested, and they say, you know what, We're
going to start funneling a ton of money toward this.
We're going to get to the bottom of the question.

(01:00:26):
What if this could lead to global cooperation involving both
private and maybe government agencies, and eventually nations begin to
collaborate on UAP research initiatives, maybe under the United Nations,
and we're able to pool data, not as one nation
looking at anomalies, but United Nations here on Earth all
looking at a question that could expand our horizons and
maybe teach us some things about ourselves. Other possibilities might

(01:00:49):
be breakthroughs and material analysis that could lead to the
discovery and discernments about materials alleged to be involved with
UAP database like my own. You know, I've got the
UAP Sidings reporting system available there at UAP sidings dot org.
I encourage you to follow a report if you've seen
something you can't explain. But again, civilian UAP databases that

(01:01:11):
are collecting data that also could be helped along by AI.
This could lead to correlations, maybe even astrophysical discoveries involving
correlations between UAP activity and certain astronomical phenomena pulsars, gamma
ray bursts, exoplanets. I don't know what might that mean.
There are a lot of potentials here, and so while
I'm open minded to the possibility that things like disclosure

(01:01:34):
could lead to great, big revelations about UAP, I think
really in terms of all the technology, all of the thought,
all of the organizations, all of the citizen action that's
being put toward the UAP question. Yet again, There is
promise in other areas too, but they don't get quite
as much attention as the disclosure movement, the push for

(01:01:56):
UFO transparency. It's important, but it's just one finger on
the glove as far as the approach toward how we
resolve the phenomenon. All right, guys, I will catch you
again next year. As always, stay strange out there, and
we'll talk again soon